Posts: 4,272
Threads: 38
Joined: Jun 2011
scooter Wrote:It has some downsides, but I actually prefer closed subforums over open subforums (with no restrictions on joining) to encourage more individuals to join teams and more lurkers to step out of the shadows and participate.
Effectively they're not really different - it'll feel the same to normal players. I'd just like to see fewer global lurkers and more people joining teams so that it's closer to being a true MTDG rather than just another Pitboss with more teammates than usual.
(all my opinion and my opinion only, I'm fine with either)
+1
I'm with Scooter here.
Posts: 8,022
Threads: 37
Joined: Jan 2006
The Gordon Ramsay pic has me sold. I'll join Team Anger Management Issues, even if the captain supports a football team from Mordor.
I've got some dirt on my shoulder, can you brush it off for me?
Posts: 13,563
Threads: 49
Joined: Oct 2009
Krill Wrote:Also, I'm liking the fact I seem to have pissed off everyone on this forum at some point: no one seems to want to join me. I'm not that bad...
I would have loved to be on your team, but that would clearly have been unbalancing, given the puny competition. (Team Seven/Mack in particular)
Commodore Wrote:I just have to say this: I think of your name, in my head, as being pronounced "Ray Joe Roar". This would be a most excellent team name.
I read it Rhee-Go-Arr-Arr (so I guess he should be on team pirate). "Keek" is a very unsatisfying answer.
I have to run.
Posts: 3,390
Threads: 31
Joined: Dec 2009
I feel sorry for Krill, so I'll be joining his team.
Posts: 15,394
Threads: 112
Joined: Apr 2007
I'd be very happy with a Commodore-made map. Did Mist volunteer to admin things or am I imagining that? If so, having those two facilitate the setup stages would be especially nice.
I think the rough outline of moving forward on the game should go in steps that look roughly like this:
1) Agree on subforum plan - open/closed? After that, create subforums for each team, giving a member or two on each team moderator ability for their team's subforum only (this is possible right?). It's hard to do official votes on things until you can consolidate a vote to one vote/team, and we can't do that until we have somewhere for teams to discuss their own preferences. I'd suggest we get a "RB Demogame" subforum on the high-level which then contains 5 sub-forums, similar to how PB6 was set up.
1b) Continue to recruit for more signups while this is all going on. 
2) Vote on settings as necessary. We don't need 45 polls or anything insane, but I suspect there will be some votes for things like double-move rule ratification, spies, corporations, etc. We can leave a lot of things up to the mapmaker.
3) Once all settings are locked and sealed, leader picking can happen
4) Game on?
Posts: 8,022
Threads: 37
Joined: Jan 2006
With 5 teams, how do people feel about some sort of system that makes the leader spread a bit more interesting than the CFC Demogame? I think a snakepick is required but its a little too easy for power combos when there's only 10 picks total. I'm actually preferential to something like the PBEM10 setup but I'm sure I'm in a minority there.
I've got some dirt on my shoulder, can you brush it off for me?
Posts: 9,706
Threads: 69
Joined: Dec 2010
Krill Wrote:OK, just one more question, are our fora going to be open or closed (with any player able to join upon their request)? I'm happy with either, just want to gauge others opinions.
I think fora should be open. I understand the reasoning of trying to make the lurkers sign up and contribute with a team, but I still think making open fora is better. I think it's pretty clear that everyone is encouraged to join any of the teams, so we don't need to coerce anyone to do it.
And I think that that's enough thinking for now.
Posts: 23,659
Threads: 134
Joined: Jun 2009
Yay, I have minions
Current games (All): RtR: PB83
Ended games (Selection): BTS games: PB1, PB3, PBEM2, PBEM4, PBEM5B, PBEM50. RB mod games: PB5, PB15, PB27, PB37, PB42, PB46, PB71 PB80. FFH games: PBEMVII, PBEMXII. Civ 6: PBEM22 PBEM23Games ded lurked: PB18
Posts: 999
Threads: 5
Joined: Apr 2011
I'm up for some spamming if any team wants.
Posts: 8,821
Threads: 75
Joined: Apr 2006
Gaspar Wrote:With 5 teams, how do people feel about some sort of system that makes the leader spread a bit more interesting than the CFC Demogame? I think a snakepick is required but its a little too easy for power combos when there's only 10 picks total. I'm actually preferential to something like the PBEM10 setup but I'm sure I'm in a minority there.
All is right in the world, Gaspar and Darrell are back to disagreeing . I don't like the idea of taking any leaders/civs off the table. I guess my opinion on settings, in general, is let's leave as much on the table as we can. I'd suggest a thin list of bans (nukes, spies, corps) for balance issues but I'd actually leave on tech trading, barbs, etc. Not a vote for Team South Beach, just my $0.02.
Darrell
|
